Re: Years ago ...
The parallel is not exact but is worth some consideration. The issue with the CIA's action in Pakistan, at least the issue right now, is that people are refusing vaccination because they don't trust those authorities who provide it and say it is needed. A similar loss of trust elsewhere may cause a similar backlash. I.E. Western Australian citizens think the app is only there to track their movements without reason and refuse to install it, actively attempt to break it, or launch an organized protest (I think each of those actions would be justified in such a situation). This would destroy any benefit of the app.
Not only would you not have the data for police investigations, you wouldn't have it for health investigations either. Worse, building trust takes a lifetime and destroying it takes a week. Even if you don't care about this app, the next thing a mistrusted government says is necessary may be distrusted and opposed because the last time it was used unethically. That could be anything. In Pakistan, it's a COVID jab which means we may soon see an Epsilon variant stemming from a breach of trust over a decade old. In WA's case, nobody knows what it could be. All I know is that you probably don't want to find out in 2029 that people won't do what the WA government says is needed because they don't trust them.
The response to this pandemic and most other societal problems relies on trusting authorities. Where the authorities are trusted to tell the truth, act in the best interests of the people, and be beholden to their wishes, you get stability. Where that trust is eroded, you get risk. Where the trust is flaky, you get dictatorship. Where trust has vanished, you get civil war. It is the responsibility of authorities to maintain that trust by following understandable ethical rules.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
